As I understand it, a Special Counsel has a great deal of independence, so that he cannot be pressured politically in his investigation. I can understand this, and agree.
Mueller should not have conducted a raid on Cohen, who was cooperating.
Even more so, Mueller should not have made an armed, televised, early morning arrest of Stone.
Or of Manafort.
But use of force is ridiculous in these cases. None were accused, or even suspected, of violent crimes. None were a flight risk.
Mueller should be called on the carpet for these unnecessary actions. If nothing else, they wasted an excessive amount of taxpayer money. But more importantly, they have a political impact.
But he is. This is wrong.
However, Trump *is* responsible for ensuring his appointed officers follow the Rule of Law, and are impartial in the Rule of Law.
Mueller is clearly not.
Trump SHOULD stop an investigation that is not investigating collusion with Russia any longer.
Trump SHOULD ensure the DoJ/FBI does not give Clinton preferential treatment.
Not one of these actions showed any evidence of collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign.
Not one FBI or DoJ official has been convicted and sentenced for breaking rules and laws in surveilling Trump.
Not one person has been indicted for this.
1) If a full investigation were launched, it would implicate Obama, and no one wants the political fallout from that. Obama is untouchable.
The FBI and DoJ have several past debacles.
The Ted Stevens railroading. Ruby Ridge. The Branch Davidian compound. The bogus Uranium One bribery non-investigation.
But the point is: the FBI and DoJ have made a bunch of mistakes far worse than Manafort possibly cheating on his taxes.
But Manafort is in jail, and the FBI & DoJ officials aren't.
But he SHOULD take a stronger hand in rooting out the corruption. And that includes ensuring they don't let their friends skate while going after Republicans.
But it obvious that the groups still are.
This needs to change.
Surely there are statements he can make that couldn't be Undue Influence or self-serving, that criticize the use of Process Violations instead of charging actual crimes.
There are all sorts of protections, including Presumed Innocence in the Eyes of the Law until Proven Guilty.
You are presumed guilty unless you can some how prove your innocence.
This is because the FBI is considered the authority on whether you lied, rather than just misspoke, or misunderstood, or misremembered.
It's 100% based on the FBI saying, "we have proof. Here are our notes."
The FBI has already convicted you before they bring the charge. The judge just rubberstamps it.
But in the cases we've seen so far, the FBI gets a record of what you said/did, a recording or other hard data. They get to keep it. To study it.
They can ask their questions 50 different ways. They can ask you to write things down from memory. Multiple times.
If you get anything wrong: guilty.
If you begin to wonder what you actually *did* say (remember, they have the recording and can listen to it 500 times. You only have your memory of what you said 2 years ago): guilty.
The FBI says: "He said this one day. Then he said this another day. One is a lie."
How can you defend yourself? the FBI says it. Who is the judge going to believe? The FBI or this suspected criminal?
It's railroading. injustice
Sorry. But I'm done now.